About your Search

20110701
20110731
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
, which is also the problem of pakistan, becomes a regional problem in which the country's in the region have a stake in solving and are not -- there's a reasonable chance that can be pulled off. >> dr. brzezinski, you mentioned pakistan. the focus of policy leaders. turning away from afghanistan, we got reports the journalist who was killed by the isi inside pakistan further out is complicating our relationship with that group. we announced going in to kill osama bin laden. how do we manage this relationship that's been difficult to manage for as far as the eye can see? >> well, first of all, we have to recognize we are dealing here with two sifrl conflicts. one in afghanistan and the one in pakistan. there's a conflict in pakistan. there isn't a foreign intervention trying to resolve it. it is a great internal conflict. what we are seeing in pakistan is a series of contradictory policies, contradictory engagements and contradictory engagements. the army wants to preserve a stable pakistan that is assured of security and sees the united states as a component of the success in that quest
of pakistan that will bring success to local areas. a country from kabul, it will never happen. we are wasting time and money. the fact we are leaving may assist in the development of stability in local areas. they will never be a centrally governed pakistan, i mean afghanistan. afghanistan is not like iraq. give me one more second and i'll tell you what i think is going to happen in iraq. we'll probably go back to having one bloodthirsty tyrant to rule the country. that's the irony of iraq. >> happy days, wes. >> afghanistan is extraordinarily tribal. it's difficult to have a conversation about afghanistan. one story i loved was one of the things we did in afghanistan when i was working with the civil affairs team, giving out flags to children and local leaders. they would look at the flag and say what is this. you would have to explain, it's your country. there's another thing, i think you brought up a good point, joe. afghanistan is not iraq. you are right. there's a crucial player, though that factors in. that's iran. iran is not only very active and involved, but in addition to that, iran
as well. pat. >> dr. brzezinski, let me talk to you about pakistan. powers flu out, richard nixon tilted, doctor brzezinski was over there looking down the pass. they were a great ally in the cold war. now it looks like we have lost pakistan. have we lost pakistan? if so, why and was it inevitable. >> i think we are losing pakistan. i don't know if we have lost it yet. if we disengage intelligently and engage in the umbrella i have been talking about, her happens we will lose it all together. i think the fault is two way. first of all, we have never been really consistently and comprehensively sensitive to the political interests in having a secure backyard in afghanistan. we just haven't. resently, we played with indi s indians. we give a super nuclear deal to the indians. we did not give it to the pakistanis. there's resentment there. pakistan is coming undone on its own. it's not all our undoing. there's a conflict between the army and society at large. divisions between the army and the military and intelligence. ethnic differences. regional differences in pakistan. plus, this overw
after the entire terrorist infrastructure inside of pakistan. >>dave: are we taking our eye off the ball? all we hear about is al qaeda? panetta and general petraeus saying we close to finishing them off. is that a public perception? >>guest: i'm concerned by the fact they do recite that there is a war on al qaeda and there are other groups like the indian mujaheddin who is in the to be a front for l.e.t. which operates openly in pakistan. a vast array of groups with the same ideology of al qaeda and we have to go after them just as much. >>dave: what role did pakistani play in this and are they our friend or foe? >>guest: the l.e.t. operate a huge infrastructure in magazine stage and bragged they have 200 facilities operating in pakistan and they have charity schools and pakistan does nothing about it. >>dave: and the funding of the military, we have cut off the military funding. is pakistan saying you need to start the money flowing again here? or we will in the help you? >>guest: that is the direction they are moving. i expect a rise in the attacks in afghanistan or to bring that mess
in mack -- in pakistan. any word on who is responsible? >> officials are waiting for claims of responsibility with nothing has materialized. it is coordinated and showing sophisticated operation. one believes that the group with loose ties to pakistani may be responsible. >> with a dramatic attack like this, coordinated obviously over three locations, it took money, and it took planning and that always raised the specter of the i.s.i. >>reporter: the plot relied on i.e.d.'s a style we have seen in iraq and afghanistan but the officials say this was sophisticated, and coordinated, and it had a high degree of planning. >> are officials placing significance on the date? >>reporter: the media is reporting the explosions coincide with the birthday of mohammed who is the only surviving gunman from the mumbai assault in 2008, and that commando style assault was effective and relied on ten young pakistani militants who went on a rampage armed with handguns and cell phones and backpacks filled with explosives. and the group behind that attack leaves the question if the attack is also
now for panetta is to keep attacking al qaeda in pakistan, yemen, and somalia. >> now is the moment following what happened with bin laden to put maximum pressure on them. because i do believe that if we continue this effort that we can really cripple al qaeda. as a threat to this country. >> the u.s. has long said it believes al qaeda remains very interested in high-profile attacks and would like nothing better than to bring down a u.s. aircraft. apparently, osama bin laden was even talking about assembling a team of operatives. but of course, those navy s.e.a.l.s killed him in the compound before he could carry out the plan any further. >> general petraeus, i take it is getting ready to leave afghanistan, heading over to the cia? >> very soon. in fact, the change of command ceremony that will turn everything over in afghanistan to marine corps general john allen will take place monday morning in kabul. petraeus will get on a plane, come back to the united states, retire from years of service in the active duty army, and, in fact, in the coming weeks will do exactly that. take over
of the wars in afghanistan and pakistan. >> still not getting serious. >> i went away from fuzzy. >> is that like jerry at trick math? >> yes. >> are you surprised they don't have a deal today? i actually really -- i mean, i really thought -- >> i would be shocked if they don't have a deal in the next two or three days. again, republican freshmen may have a big ideology difference with barack obama and his world view, and the divide is no greater than ronald reagan's was with tip o'neal in 1983 when they sat down, and they did a kneel. yes, you differ with barack obama and the democrats, but -- >> usually you are good at seeing somebody's angle. like you know what their angle was. what is the angle here? i don't get it. >> these republicans believe this is their only opportunity -- >> are they so stuck to the contract with the tea party they cannot think outside the box for the good of the country? seriously? >> can i finish? you asked a question and i need to finish. they understand one thing. >> what do they understand? >> they are dead right about this. this is their best chan
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)